Jump to content


Military Movies and Accuracy...


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

Cannon x Fodder #1 Posted 18 December 2017 - 02:36 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13358 battles
  • 977
  • Member since:
    08-17-2014

Why is it so hard for movie makers to get the small stuff right in a movie.  I don't mean having to have the tactics perfect or anything, but good grief, at least have them practice weapon discipline.  Have them use proper radio etiquette, the correct phonetic alphabet for the time periods etc...  He'll, we have thousands of vets that could work as advisors, why can't they use them.

 

This rant started because of the movie, The Wall.  If you've seen it and you've ever been in the military, you'll under stand my frustration.

 

/rant.



Wroclaw #2 Posted 20 December 2017 - 06:00 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 57249 battles
  • 4,662
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

Battle of the Bulge 1965

 

the director actually tried to claim the german tanks used in the movie were real WW2 tigers / panthers.

 

he made that claim repeatedly during the films promotion.

 

that level of brazenness wouldnt get done these days of course  . . . . . .  



darrenv64 #3 Posted 20 December 2017 - 07:22 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 9449 battles
  • 396
  • [741ST]
  • Member since:
    06-06-2017

So, from a vets point of view. Every military themed and historical movie I see has little annoyances in it.

Star Wars, (even though it's Science Fiction/Fantasy) for example, has a skilled bush pilot (Luke Skywalker, who fly's his T-16), thrust into the equivalent role of flying an F-15C (X-Wing) into combat with only a few hours of "certification."

Just got done watching "Dunkirk." At the end, Tom Hardy fly's his out of gas Spitfire, gliding along the French coast at less than 1000 feet elevation, shoots down a Ju 87, then has time to pump his gear down for a beach landing. Then, sets it ablaze with a flare gun (remember, no gas), burning it to the ground so the Germans don't get their hands on it, and hangs out to be captured.

General rule, a Jack-of-all trades, is a master of none. In the television series "JAG" (Judge Advocate General, a military law expert), we see our title character flying an F-14 Tomcat, and landing it on an Aircraft Carrier.


 



Cannon x Fodder #4 Posted 22 December 2017 - 01:44 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13358 battles
  • 977
  • Member since:
    08-17-2014

View Postdarrenv64, on 20 December 2017 - 07:22 PM, said:

So, from a vets point of view. Every military themed and historical movie I see has little annoyances in it.

Star Wars, (even though it's Science Fiction/Fantasy) for example, has a skilled bush pilot (Luke Skywalker, who fly's his T-16), thrust into the equivalent role of flying an F-15C (X-Wing) into combat with only a few hours of "certification."

Just got done watching "Dunkirk." At the end, Tom Hardy fly's his out of gas Spitfire, gliding along the French coast at less than 1000 feet elevation, shoots down a Ju 87, then has time to pump his gear down for a beach landing. Then, sets it ablaze with a flare gun (remember, no gas), burning it to the ground so the Germans don't get their hands on it, and hangs out to be captured.

General rule, a Jack-of-all trades, is a master of none. In the television series "JAG" (Judge Advocate General, a military law expert), we see our title character flying an F-14 Tomcat, and landing it on an Aircraft Carrier.


 

In the defense of Jag, Harm was a naval aviator before he was a lawyer.  



A Hairy Biker #5 Posted 04 June 2018 - 03:54 PM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 8117 battles
  • 65
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014

And in Dunkirk, the Spit wouldn't glide that far nose up any way... Would have had a somewhat terminal amount of sink... And needed compressed air to fire the guns. The wheels were "pumped" down.

In fact I thought "Dunkirk" was the most idle film in regard to historical accuracy as Dad's Army.... I was shouting at theTV at one bit.

 

Seem to recall Harm had to "leave" the Navy because his night vision was poor?


Edited by A Hairy Biker, 04 June 2018 - 03:54 PM.


MRXBOX n VAN BC #6 Posted 05 June 2018 - 08:39 AM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 27867 battles
  • 140
  • Member since:
    08-24-2013

Two words ; APOCALYPSE NOW ! Deer hunter !! Full metal jacket & Platoon !!! The vidgame "Men of Valor 360" (every map came from platoon) was great when you played as William Dafoe . You gave up armor for speed and accuracy plus old school claymores. I luv'd being #1 in this game for about six months before i got onto dominateing BF2. BF2 best Vehicle game ever ! Killed just under 25,000 Tanks , Helicopters and Boats .

 

Check the real Oldies of First Blood & the 1968's "DEVILS BRIGADE". A true story of the First ever Special Forces that became the Green Berets in Vietnam! Also a must see Enemy at the Gates. 

 


Edited by MRXBOX n VAN BC, 05 June 2018 - 10:56 AM.

XBL'S #1 PLAYER FOR 10 YEARS and COUNTING !!!

Cannon x Fodder #7 Posted 01 November 2018 - 07:04 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13358 battles
  • 977
  • Member since:
    08-17-2014

View PostA Hairy Biker, on 04 June 2018 - 03:54 PM, said:

And in Dunkirk, the Spit wouldn't glide that far nose up any way... Would have had a somewhat terminal amount of sink... And needed compressed air to fire the guns. The wheels were "pumped" down.

In fact I thought "Dunkirk" was the most idle film in regard to historical accuracy as Dad's Army.... I was shouting at theTV at one bit.

 

Seem to recall Harm had to "leave" the Navy because his night vision was poor?

He had to quit flying because of his night vision that's how he ended up at JAG.  Then he was able to get his night vision fixed and went back to being an aviator.



darrenv64 #8 Posted 04 November 2018 - 06:19 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 9449 battles
  • 396
  • [741ST]
  • Member since:
    06-06-2017
Okay, reality check. A JAG has no business being on flight status, regardless of previous certifications. You’re either one or the other. A lawyer who deals with military “justice” at that level, has an enormous amount of case load, personnel, and funds management, to keep maintain an F-14 qualification. This is just an excellent example of poetic license seen too often in military themed movies and television shows. Even the movie “Fury,” had its flaws. Great story, awesome visual effects, and descent acting. However, a platoon of tanks would not be of mixed variants, and wouldn’t be sent to an objective without infantry, artillery, and other support elements. All were in abundance at this stage of the war. 

Greywoolfe64 #9 Posted 04 November 2018 - 06:45 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 16594 battles
  • 2,184
  • [27PZR]
  • Member since:
    02-13-2016
There's a low-budget 2017 release of Battle Of The Bulge that gets panned in Amazon reviews, as the people who saw it prefer the 1968 version with the M47 Pattons as Tiger IIs and Chaffee's as Shermans. This version is way more accurate- the hardware used in the movie was a Hanomag, Sdkfz9 'Famo' and Hetzer, all genuine vehicles, and an easy 8 for the allies. This gets fairly easily knocked out by a nicely CGI'ed Tiger II with Porsche turret, and there's also another CGI'd armoured column of Panzer IVH's, complete with accurate side-skirts. Radio procedure from what i could see was authentic, and the story followed an infantry unit during the first days of the battle, up until they were caught and executed by the 2nd SS Panzer division troops. Obviously it doesn't show the entire history of the battle- just the early stages when the Germans had the upper hand, but as an accurate war movie I really couldn't fault it.

"Some say that he dines on lower glacis, and that he once spent three weeks hiding in a thick French bush. All we know is, he's called the Stug!"

Current garage (MOE's marked with star*) -click spoiler.

Spoiler

 


Cannon x Fodder #10 Posted 08 November 2018 - 06:53 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13358 battles
  • 977
  • Member since:
    08-17-2014

View Postdarrenv64, on 04 November 2018 - 06:19 AM, said:

Okay, reality check. A JAG has no business being on flight status, regardless of previous certifications. You’re either one or the other. A lawyer who deals with military “justice” at that level, has an enormous amount of case load, personnel, and funds management, to keep maintain an F-14 qualification. This is just an excellent example of poetic license seen too often in military themed movies and television shows. Even the movie “Fury,” had its flaws. Great story, awesome visual effects, and descent acting. However, a platoon of tanks would not be of mixed variants, and wouldn’t be sent to an objective without infantry, artillery, and other support elements. All were in abundance at this stage of the war. 

Not disagreeing, but correct me if I'm wrong.  All it takes to be carrier qualified is to be current in both the aircraft and carrier landings?  IIRC, the currency is just hours and a check ride.  Carrier landings can be done in two days.  It's not completely out if the realm of possibilities.



Funktastic Ed #11 Posted 12 November 2018 - 08:38 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18996 battles
  • 700
  • Member since:
    11-21-2014

Most of the time movies are wrong when it comes to action.

Distance of engagement in reality are far longer, modern warfare philosophy is to kill at long range preferably, weither it's a tank, a plane or infantery, this is why most guns are equipped with scopes

Dont like campers ?

In a real combat situation you'll never see ennemies rushing out of cover.

Truth is nobody wants to die.

This leads to the second issue in war movies.

Guys standing or marching out of cover like they have an aura of invincibility, not even knowing what they are facing, how many ennemies are ahead...that's insanity.

Or guys pot firing fully standing up whith ennemy bullets flying all around, well you never do that… NEVER !


"Idiots dare everything, that's how you really know they are."

ThermalStone #12 Posted 15 November 2018 - 06:28 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 32986 battles
  • 4,720
  • [80085]
  • Member since:
    02-18-2014
Don't they actually have Patton tanks in the Patton movie?

I'm not stealing kills, I'm handing out Confederate medals.


hiroki yagami #13 Posted 05 February 2019 - 06:46 PM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 11620 battles
  • 44
  • Member since:
    08-08-2015

View PostThermalStone, on 15 November 2018 - 06:28 PM, said:

Don't they actually have Patton tanks in the Patton movie?

Yup. They're the stand ins they used for Tiger tanks. Also the tanks that were supposed to be Sherman's? They used Chafee's instead. :P



Cannon x Fodder #14 Posted 20 July 2019 - 07:22 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13358 battles
  • 977
  • Member since:
    08-17-2014

View PostFunktastic Ed, on 12 November 2018 - 08:38 AM, said:

Most of the time movies are wrong when it comes to action.

Distance of engagement in reality are far longer, modern warfare philosophy is to kill at long range preferably, weither it's a tank, a plane or infantery, this is why most guns are equipped with scopes

Dont like campers ?

In a real combat situation you'll never see ennemies rushing out of cover.

Truth is nobody wants to die.

This leads to the second issue in war movies.

Guys standing or marching out of cover like they have an aura of invincibility, not even knowing what they are facing, how many ennemies are ahead...that's insanity.

Or guys pot firing fully standing up whith ennemy bullets flying all around, well you never do that… NEVER !

While I get what you're saying, there are countless examples of people doing just that.  Clarkson's father in law during operation market garden.  He walked into a street underfire to use an anti tank weapon against a tiger 1, earning a VC in the process.  John Basilone on Guadalcanal hip firing a browning 1919.  Audey Murphy and his antics.

 

Yes the average soldier is not going to willingly do those things but, as Connery learned, never say never.



Aethelwulf Rex #15 Posted 06 November 2019 - 05:03 AM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 35454 battles
  • 68
  • [MONG0]
  • Member since:
    12-16-2015
Bit like wg and historical accuracy?

LignoTestudon #16 Posted 12 November 2019 - 09:15 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 5657 battles
  • 284
  • [D7CAV]
  • Member since:
    11-08-2014

Rated R movies nowadays don't make as much money like Rated PG-13 movies have been making. No clue what all the corporate studios have done to rile people up, get them to act more than outrageous, and them thinking and feeling things like violence, nudity, culture, political correctness to be as gratuitous and offensive. YouTube creators riled up because of corporate corruption (YouTube and Google). What's offensive, asinine and inappropriate about those things, anyway? No wonder there have been tons of division, community-wise, gaming-wise, and industry-wise.



LignoTestudon #17 Posted 12 November 2019 - 09:20 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 5657 battles
  • 284
  • [D7CAV]
  • Member since:
    11-08-2014
Movies like military ones have been around since forever. Division of most types. Outrage, cancel, woke, PC, and pop cultures. I hate those cultures now as much as some of you have.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users